Memory Alpha:Category suggestions
---- In-universe categories Borg spatial designations Subcat of "Regions" and "Borg". There are a heaping helping of grids listed on the above page. --LauraCC (talk) 16:41, August 2, 2017 (UTC) Having them all in one one category allows non-grids to be included too. Or we could template this, I suppose. --LauraCC (talk) 17:34, February 24, 2018 (UTC) Sleep We have Category:Death for death-related items. What about a category for "sleep"? Here is a list of the sleep-related items I've compiled. * Alarm clock * Alpha-wave inducer * Alpha wave * Bed * Bedding * Bedroom * Bedtime/Nap time * Blanket * Crib * Delta sleep * Delta-wave inducer * Delta wave * Directed dreaming * Dolbargy sleeping trance * Dormancy period * Dream * Dream analysis * Dreamcatcher * Exhaustion * Eyelid * Hibernation * Hibernation pod * Hypnagogia * Hypnosis * Insomnia * Lucid dream * Lullaby * Mattress * (Warm) Milk * Milk toddy * Nap * Night * Night cap * Nightgown * Nightmare * Pajamas * Pillow * Quarters * Rapid eye movement * Regeneration * Rock-a-bye Baby * Sedative ** Ambizine ** Anesthizine ** Axonol ** Dylamadon ** Felicium ** Improvoline ** Kayolane ** Melorazine ** Merfadon ** Neuro-sedative ** Sonambutril ** Terakine ** Tetrovaline * Sheets * Sleep * Sleep, Little Warrior * Sleep disorder * Sleeping area/space * Sleeping bag * Sleeping Beauty * Sleep mask * Sleep cycle * Sleeper ship * Sleepwalking * Sleeping mat * Somnetic inducer * Snoring * Tent * Trance * Yawn --LauraCC (talk) 19:32, August 23, 2018 (UTC) It would also be a subcat of Category:Biology, just as death and sex already are. --LauraCC (talk) 18:23, September 18, 2018 (UTC) Sedative could have its own category, or navbox template. --LauraCC (talk) 21:04, February 1, 2019 (UTC) Which of the above two methods I/we should choose to classify sedatives is the sticking point here. --LauraCC (talk) 15:01, April 30, 2019 (UTC) Otherwise, I'd have done it by now. --LauraCC (talk) 01:09, December 7, 2019 (UTC) Fabrics category=fashion category=materials ordermethod=title namespace= Subcat of fashion and materials. For all fabrics out of which clothing, blankets, etc is made. --LauraCC (talk) 17:50, September 13, 2018 (UTC) Departments A category for all departments, with appropriate subcategories, under Category:Organizations. These pages seem to be either under Category:Agencies or Category:Spacecraft sections. The first seems perfectly fine, while the other doesn't, since most spacecraft departments are spread out over several sections of a spacecraft, and are at the very least a group of people as well as several locations. This needs a bit more input, but it seems weird to me that Science department redirects to the group Sciences division while Engineering department is a section of a ship, not the Operations division. - 23:08, November 15, 2019 (UTC) :I'm doing some major work on departments right now (it just so happened you caught me having sorted out engineering department but not yet science department) and there's more or less three types: firstly, starships are organized into departments (life sciences department, exobiology department, etc). Secondly, some Federation agencies happen to be called department of this or that (Department of Temporal Investigations etc) while others... aren't, and in fact there's a dizzying array of other options (bureau, office, committee, and many more). And thirdly, there's a number of 20th century Earth local organizations that happen to be departments of various government entities (Detroit Police Department, San Francisco Department of Sanitation, etc) :These three groups have very little in common except for the word. A Starship departments category that would go under Spacecraft sections makes logical sense to me, because there's a coherent idea behind that. I'm working on an article on those that would also contain a list of those and I think there's about 8-9. But as for other departments, grouping them together just because a writer decided to incorporate the word department and not something else feels like a bad idea. That would just divide things up by a more or less arbitrary criterium, even though Federation departments really do belong under Federation agencies, Earth police departments really do belong under Earth agencies, et cetera. I think the biggest real problem underlying this is the nebulous nature of the Spacecraft sections category, which is a catch-all for a bunch of different types of things. There's a lot to be said for rethinking Spacecraft sections, but a department category is not the answer. -- Capricorn (talk) 09:04, November 16, 2019 (UTC) ::Maybe subdivisions? Spacecraft departments? Starfleet departments? --LauraCC (talk) 17:46, November 19, 2019 (UTC) :Here's the aformentioned list of Starship departments, by the way. -- Capricorn (talk) 16:00, November 22, 2019 (UTC) We should definitely take a look at spacecraft sections, and maybe agencies, if only to see if a better term would apply. It might be worth it to just rethink the entire organization tree while we're at it, there seems to be a lot of ambiguity of terms and branches doubling back. A navigation template should be enough to cover linking the spacecraft/starship departments. - 22:34, November 22, 2019 (UTC) Energy fields A category for energy fields (see the list). Subcat of Category:Energy. --LauraCC (talk) 20:33, November 19, 2019 (UTC) Romulan language With PIC, there are now many more Romulan language terms than there were before. A category akin to Category:Klingonese and Category:Vulcan language may be useful. -- UncertainError (talk) 01:52, February 14, 2020 (UTC) :Support. - 16:21, February 14, 2020 (UTC) Production POV categories Archival footage performers I noticed that Leonard Nimoy is listed as a Discovery performer now. Having in addition "archival footage performers" would cover the use of footage in both DIS and TOS's episodes, as well as actors in scenes, for instance, used in , whose characters only appear in that episode by virtue of old footage from previous episodes. --LauraCC (talk) 15:49, May 8, 2019 (UTC) :Oppose. A category provides no context and the scope is unwieldily and unhelpful. Should be a page if anything, but this name is horrid. - 06:48, May 9, 2019 (UTC) What would you suggest instead? --LauraCC (talk) 16:56, May 21, 2019 (UTC) "Performers who appeared in archival footage"? --LauraCC (talk) 19:33, July 30, 2019 (UTC) :Why are you excluding voice over? - * 19:45, August 21, 2019 (UTC) Not intentionally. "Performers who appeared in archival material"? --LauraCC (talk) 14:58, August 23, 2019 (UTC) Subcategories for production staff by series Category:Performers contains subcategories by series (Category:TOS performers, Category:TAS performers, Category:Film performers, Category:TNG performers, etc.) Is there any particular reason why other production staff should not also be subcategorized by series? The obvious place to start would be Category:Writers. I suggest the following subcats: *TOS writers *TAS writers *Film writers *TNG writers *DS9 writers *VOY writers *ENT writers *DIS writers *ST writers *PIC writers *LD writers It would be a bit of work, but I think that having those categories in addition to the existing lists would be a useful tool for readers. And if writer subcats are successful, we could consider subcats for directors, special and visual effects staff, and so forth. —Josiah Rowe (talk) 02:52, September 11, 2019 (UTC) :I think this would be particularly useful for any people who worked in a creative (and prolific) capacity, to get a sense of which world they most influenced, at a glance. Not sure if that makes sense to anyone else or not...--LauraCC (talk) 15:46, September 17, 2019 (UTC) ::After thinking on this for awhile now, I'm not convinced yet this is a good idea. There are over 5000 performers while there are only 400+ writers, and every other production staff category gets smaller from there. I don't think 3 pages searching in the category is enough of a problem to be worth the other issues this would create. We also have pages for each of these which, unlike the series' performer pages, are fairly easy to maintain. It seems to me that we should just add a "series work on" option to sidebar template for production personal if all we're trying to do is make that info available quickly without reading the article. - 19:35, September 17, 2019 (UTC) :That's a reasonable solution to this. --LauraCC (talk) 18:55, September 30, 2019 (UTC) Deceased performers I have seen other tv show Wiki pages that do indeed have a deceased performers category, and it makes all kinds of sense to have it here.--GILESFAN411 (talk) 00:13, December 13, 2019 (UTC) :The (still far off) problem is that eventually any performer currently listed on MA will eventually wind up in said category. I don't think there's another category like that on the whole site. --LauraCC (talk) 17:08, December 17, 2019 (UTC) Maintenance categories